Critical Annotation

Summary of Major Points

After discussing the basics of school finance policy, types of funding for schools, and the allocation of state and federal funds for schools, King, Swanson, and Sweetland (2003) presented the importance of rethinking school finance to attain high learning standards. They discussed technical efficiency, a term that economists typically use to uncover research revealing which combination of inputs has the most favourable effect on student performance outcomes. For example, which class size, coupled with what level of certificated teacher yields the highest level of student learning? Analysts studying technical efficiency do not consider the financial costs of inputs. Rather, they contemplate the effectiveness of the inputs. For example, when analysts study the effects of class size on student learning, they do not consider resource requirements for physical space, human resources, or supplies. They want to know how class size affects student learning.

Through Odden & Webb’s (as cited by King, Swanson, and Sweetland, 2003) effective-schools research, it is evident that effective classroom teaching practices include high expectations, good classroom management techniques, and high levels of time-on-task. Effective schools also have strong leadership, particularly in the principal’s position, who coordinates the instructional program at the building level in a highly structured, but not bureaucratic. According to Odden & Webb (as cited in King, Swanson, & Sweetland, 2003), the highly effective principal also establishes a community-oriented school culture with shared goals, high expectations for student performance, mechanisms to sustain motivation and commitment, collegiality among staff and students, and a school-wide focus on improvement.

Through evaluation studies, information is available about ideal class sizes, length of the school year, and special programming (King, Swanson, & Sweetland, 2003). According to research in the Tennessee Project Star (1999) study of the relationship between class size and pupil achievement, students in small classes (13-17 students) display a higher academic achievement than students in larger classes (22-26 students). The impact of class size is more significant for minority students and students attending inner-city schools. Researchers concluded that small classes are superior not because they encourage new approaches to instruction, but because teachers in small classes can engage in enough of the basic strategies they have been using all along. Based on another study in the Baltimore Public Schools (2001), researchers recommend preschool, full-day kindergarten, and extended-year programs for all low socio-economic students. In yet another evaluation study, Reynolds and Wolfe (as cited in King, Swanson, & Sweetland, 2003) studied the effects on children’s placement in special education during the elementary school years. They found that special education programming seems to add in a significant way to achievement in reading

in math, but only in the earlier grades and only for children with learning disabilities instead of hearing, sight, or physical handicaps.

According to King, Swanson, & Sweetland (2003), analysts who studied economic and technical efficiency have presented conflicting results. Considering researchers’ revelations about improving student learning, it appears that many schools are using the resources allocated to them inefficiently. Schools, in general, are not using what educators know to be best practices. In typical schools, large numbers of specialized teachers are working outside regular classrooms; teachers have short, segmented periods of planning time during the school day; little school-level consideration is given to grouping students for instruction, and secondary school teachers instruct five completely different groups of students for less than an hour each day. For schools to be more effective, leaders must restructure how resources are spent.

Miles and Darling-Hammond (as cited in King, Swanson, & Sweetland, 2003) note six resource reallocation strategies used by high-performing schools to improve current resources achievement. They suggest reducing specialized programs, providing more flexible student grouping by school-level professionals, creating more personalized environments, offering longer and varied instructional time blocks, requiring more common planning time for staff, and creatively defining staff roles and schedules. Additionally, King, Swanson, and Sweetland (2003) recommend that teachers receive salary increases as they earn additional certifications to enable schools with more flexibility in providing services to students. This flexibility allows schools to maximize resources, as multiple professionals can provide numerous services. For example, if a speech pathologist is certified in guidance, the student’s social-emotional needs could be addressed within a speech therapy session. While research provides information about improving educational efficiency; many districts are not using their resources to their full advantage (King, Swanson, and Sweetland, 2003). Today’s school leaders have the challenge of breaking through tradition and changing school structures to maximize resources.